Coin-a-Thought : Vote or Revolt

Some ideas are hard to explain in a post of thirty second sound bite. Like ignorance is bliss. You could give a basic explanation of that but you have to sit with it in your head for any real understanding. In an attempt to allow more ideas so sit in your head longer I am going to chop some thoughts down to little, hard to forget bites. When they apply, you will remember and hopefully see more clearly.

From FT.com's Crookblog via EconLog
Acctualy from a book but this is where it hit me.

"I would sooner take up arms against a government that saw me as a child than vote for it."

Vote Or Revolt. Our redress is when we vote. If the will of the majority is no longer heard then do we Revolt? So when do you stop voting and start revolting. Two more elections as I look at it now. In the times we live, we are all going to have to decide in the next few years:

Vote OR Revolt

Media Matters Problems With the Media

I need to stop looking around the web so much. I get into trouble. I am looking to build traffic so in one of those little blog pool, hope to find things I could comment on. Well with out going into half a novel. Even more myths and falsehoods surrounding the economic recovery plan
Media Matter No. Weellll. Let's see how bad it is. And here we are.

1. The bill will not stimulate the economy
It will but not that much.. if any. And not mostly in the first years

2. Government spending in the bill is not stimulus
Some is, some is pretty iffy, and some is regulation(not stimulus)

3. There is no reason for stimulus after a turnaround begins
For a while but exactly how long? The end of time? McCain sunset?

(Just to be clear I only half heartedly read some of this. You know where some of it goes.)
4. Corporate tax rate cuts and capital gains tax rate cuts would provide substantial stimulus
Almost got me. ( quote of a quote)

"Cutting corporate tax rates on a temporary basis, as some have suggested, could even discourage investment. Cutting tax rates reduces the value of deductions that companies claim when they invest, make other purchases, pay wages, or depreciate equipment; for example, a $1,000 deduction is worth $350 at the current 35 percent corporate tax rate but would be worth only $250 at a 25 percent rate. If tax rates were cut on a temporary basis, companies would have an incentive to delay investments until the rate returned to 35 percent and deductions regained their lost value."

This may be true. It is however ass backward. It is about giving the company more money to spend. Company made $100,000 after cost. Takes 30,000 in deductions. 70,000 left. At 35% gives 24500. at 25% gives 17500. A 7000 dollar difference? Is that right? I guess your really taking about the costs to begin with. Your giving the company more money. If they have more money they can spend how they wish, make more money. Advertising, new equipment, more employees and invest. They can make more money than they supposedly "save" by waiting for higher tax right offs? They are not going to try to make money with extra money? Almost got me.

"Any windfall that taxpayers receive from a capital gains tax cut is unlikely to be spent quickly. The main beneficiaries of capital gains tax cuts would be high-income taxpayers, who own the vast majority of assets."

Fine. I don't disagree. The point however is that people like to make money. If money, especially large chunks of money, that are in gold, in bonds or under the mattress go back into the market (because "high-income taxpayers"like to make money) companies have more money to make more money and grow the economy. Some people might make enough in a good economy to have to worry about capital gains. Wouldn't that be horrible.

5. Undocumented immigrants without Social Security numbers would be eligible for the "Making Work Pay" tax credit

"No credit shall be allowed under this section to an eligible individual who does not include on the return of tax for the taxable year --

(i) such individual's taxpayer identification number, and(cont.)"

We got a "taxpayer identification number" for my dead grandmother's estate? I think? Does she get a tax credit? And how do "undocumented works" pay taxes? With a "taxpayer identification number"? I don't know. Really I don't have a clear answer.
6. CBO analysis found the majority of stimulus won't take effect for a year and a half
Shifting sand, but it all should be in the next 18-24 months.

7. Food stamps, unemployment payments are not stimulus
They are but how much? And when does the increase end?

8. The New Deal did not lower unemployment
Don't know. I think though a 10 year depression? They did something wrong at the very least.

"Paul Krugman has written that the New Deal produced "long-run achievements" that "remain the bedrock of our nation's economic stability" and that Roosevelt's short-term successes were constrained because "he was eager to return to conservative budget principles."'

Don't buy that. The social safety net? Its been a long running debate that is beginning to lose.

9. Fiscal stimulus in Japan failed during the "lost decade" of the 1990s
( are there any documents that don't link to their site?)

"that "the 1995 stimulus package ... did result in solid growth in 1996, demonstrating that fiscal policy does work when it is tried. As on earlier occasions in the 1990s, however, the positive response to fiscal stimulus was undercut by fiscal contraction in 1996 and 1997.""

If the uber-consumer stops spend that happens. The uber-consumer should never become existed in the first place. "You just have to spend more"? Just keep the economy propped up by deficit spending forever. That's Healthy. Wait. There's a problem. You need lots of little consumers. They harder to control but the system is much more stable.

10. The economic recovery bill would amount to spending more than $200K per job created



Done.
11. $4.19 billion of stimulus "would go to" ACORN
ACORN gives and gets money from all kinds of place. If the bill doesn't say ACORN that doesn't mean they won't. I haven't looked into this.

12. Robert Reich proposed excluding white males from recovery plan
I posted this socialist nonsense video before. See it for yourself.

They seem to look at the issues from weird angles. It never quite makes sense to me. I am willing to listen. I haven't heard anything yet.

My Brain as a Bad Filter on the World

My brain works in a kind of non sequential manner. It takes in info and ideas and then tends to boil it down, it is much easier to remember and understand for me. When I go to explain an idea the finer detail that went in is lost. I think in much more complex and explain more simply. As much as it may be an impediment to getting ideas out I don't think I'd change for fear of losing the little gains in insight I make on my own.

I is not that others haven't made the same little leaps, but no one can read everything. As for me I read far less than i should. My insights I understand. It my required a book to be written to convincingly get the same point across. To be clear I can usually ramble to several badly organized pages on a topic not to a convincing book.

Thus the heart of my brain problems. The outside view is one of over simplified and poorly thought out views. They may be at times but often it is me trying to stick to the point. The point, I am always trying to find or write in concise way that I don't have to boil down and can be reproduced out of my head with ease.

Free Lunch

Caught this on Book Tv. Should be at he top but won't post the video till Monday.
David Cay Johnston, author of "Free Lunch: How the Wealthiest Americans Enrich Themselves at Government Expense (And Stick You With the Bill)"

I try to say away from those that are blaming the rich or corporations for problems. I am willing to listen to the reason behind a subsidy thought i often think that it is a bad idea. He doesn't blame them. It sounds to me from this that mainly we are and to a lesser extent our government are stupid or fell asleep on the job, also stupid. Companies are out to make money, they are not evil they just do what the are supposed to do. We all know that so if we offer them free money they will take it. From what he is saying and i am to young to know better that around 1980 we decided that it was okay for health insurance to go from non profit to for profit. What? Why? i don't know and care. just fix it.

He also references numbers from other countries and how they work on various subjects. this scares me, but he wasn't pushing the single payer for health care, although it seemed to be the one he favored. He cover a variety of subject and covers problems well, the solution i might disagree on, but very informative.

There is also a web site with some small out takes

The Reason interview and one from NPR

Reasoned Self Doubt

I have as i hope most of us have found ourselves doubting what we are doing. My doubt about this project is more reasoned i hope. I will freely admit to a vast and at times overwhelming amount of ignorance on my part. My fear is that this clouds my judgment on the usefulness of the intellect that i have. Worse yet my intellect may not be as good as i think it is. By no means is it at any sort of great level at lest for now. I think intellect can be trained to do better, but is mine of any use to anyone but me now.

Does my ignorance cloud my judgment on what is in my head.
I do not ignore, nor should i or anyone, the emotional or metaphysical side of what goes on in ones own head. It comes into play because there reasonable arguments for both sides. The problem in this, i have little evidence that i have much of use to say and after staring at the wall i have some thought new to me, it seems someone has had it all ready. Not only that but has written a book and in some cases books have been written on that book. Ignorance, mine in this first instance leads to this doubt because i do not know, ignorance. It seems apparent watching and listening to media in general that they are even more clueless than i. that unfortunately gives me some hope. Have much of that is a reflection of the people.
Ok so one side i have scholars with double PhD.s that seem to make some sense when i understand them and the other the dribble that seems to be the mainstream. There is no real reasoned answer, so i suppose i should just push the reasoned doubt away and do my best to move on.